I just gotta ask the question...
How stupid do both the Lieberman and Lamont camps think black voters are?
First, Lieberman's campaign released a ridiculous flyer implying that Lamont's country club membership makes him racist (sorry Dan, but I don't buy it). Lamont volunteered in urban schools which serve low-income minority students, so clearly the man was socially and racially conscious before this race began.
And then Jane Hamsher, not technically on the Lamont payroll but certainly one of Lamont's cheerleaders-in-chief, manages to see the flyer (and raise it through the roof) by posting a picture of Lieberman with blackface. It was deleted from the Huffington Post website where it was originally posted, leaving the right wingnut blogs to carry it. The progressive blogosphere's silence on it is deafening. There's something very, very wrong when it's the progressives who are silent about someone posting a JPG of the most racist thing someone could do with Photoshop, giving conservatives an opening to posture about tolerance.
It all really begs the question - do the Lieberman and Lamont camps really think that the IQ of black voters is so low that they will actually respond positively to these things? What the hell are they thinking?
Someone needs to realize that the attacks from both camps are only going to hurt the Democratic party and its image to voters - not just in CT, but across the country. Someone in this race needs to come clean and call a timeout on all this. But something tells me that neither side will.
Update: Fleshed out the first full paragraph and changed "campaigns" in the first sentence to "camps" to further clarify that the Hamsher blackface picture was not authorized by the Lamont campaign. To his great credit, I hear Lamont's campaign manager asked Hamsher to take down the photo.
I finally have the a/c working in my new apartment, so I'm moving in tonight. Unfortunately, it doesn't have internet access yet, and won't until I can find a month-to-month service that won't bankrupt me (shoot me an email if you know of one), so I won't be doing evening updates for a couple days. Hope everyone has a pleasant evening, and if you're on the East Coast - stay cool.
First, Lieberman's campaign released a ridiculous flyer implying that Lamont's country club membership makes him racist (sorry Dan, but I don't buy it). Lamont volunteered in urban schools which serve low-income minority students, so clearly the man was socially and racially conscious before this race began.
And then Jane Hamsher, not technically on the Lamont payroll but certainly one of Lamont's cheerleaders-in-chief, manages to see the flyer (and raise it through the roof) by posting a picture of Lieberman with blackface. It was deleted from the Huffington Post website where it was originally posted, leaving the right wingnut blogs to carry it. The progressive blogosphere's silence on it is deafening. There's something very, very wrong when it's the progressives who are silent about someone posting a JPG of the most racist thing someone could do with Photoshop, giving conservatives an opening to posture about tolerance.
It all really begs the question - do the Lieberman and Lamont camps really think that the IQ of black voters is so low that they will actually respond positively to these things? What the hell are they thinking?
Someone needs to realize that the attacks from both camps are only going to hurt the Democratic party and its image to voters - not just in CT, but across the country. Someone in this race needs to come clean and call a timeout on all this. But something tells me that neither side will.
Update: Fleshed out the first full paragraph and changed "campaigns" in the first sentence to "camps" to further clarify that the Hamsher blackface picture was not authorized by the Lamont campaign. To his great credit, I hear Lamont's campaign manager asked Hamsher to take down the photo.
I finally have the a/c working in my new apartment, so I'm moving in tonight. Unfortunately, it doesn't have internet access yet, and won't until I can find a month-to-month service that won't bankrupt me (shoot me an email if you know of one), so I won't be doing evening updates for a couple days. Hope everyone has a pleasant evening, and if you're on the East Coast - stay cool.
posted by Matt Smith at 1:43 PM
83 Comments:
Lord Lieberman is the Dean Scream of 2006
I saw the "Lieberman" picture on FDL. The photoshop-job made him look like The Prince of Darkness, not an African-American. Seems reasonable to me. Accurate, really.
Ned and his Nuts! They're quite a TEAM!
Ned and those nut-nut-nut-nut nutters. Those millions of dollars, all of those voters...
What the hell do they think this is, a DEMOCRACY??
Lord Lieberman is the Dean Scream of 2006
Rambo Sambo Jane! She's got class!
There once was a blogger named Jane
Who's own ego just drove her insane.
She posted blackface
Offending Black race
Lamont should just flog her with cane.
Lamont's trying to divide the Democratic Party.
I'll take a Banana Split Ticket with extra NUTS please.
Ned and his NUTS ! They're quite a Team.
Boy, you are so right about that.. looks like Lamont's really going to steamroller poor Lieberman.
Couldn't happen to a nicer guy though - heh.
There once was a blog named the Huff,
Writ of Progressive hot air and their fluff.
Along came that Jane,
Who's name is now bane
As Huff had enough of her stuff.
Look, I know the Lieberdems are pretty cracked up and stressed out these days, but this Jane Hamsher obsession is just plain strange.
Even on Huffington Post, Jane Hamsher hasn't gone anywhere. I have provided a link, as you seem to lack the computer prowess needed to happen upon Jane's latest HuffPo blog entry on your own. It was written today:
Link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-hamsher/on-the-ground-with-lamont_b_26316.html
I know she's cute and all, but is she really stalking material? I think not.
Ned and his NUTS ! They're quite a Team.
How stupid do both campaigns think black voters are?
No stupider than whites, I imagine. The kind of negative advertising that people think insults the voters intelligence are used because they work. Do you think that white voters were stupid enough to buy the Willie Horton ad? Or that other anti-Dukakis ad with the revolving-door prison? Some people thought they were.
I think the Lieberman flyer is rather clumsy, myself, not really hitting the mark. But I'm not a political strategist.
do the Lieberman and Lamont camps really think that the IQ of black voters is so low that they will actually respond positively to these things?
They're not supposed to respond positively. They're supposed to respond negatively toward the opponent, perhaps at a subliminal, unconscious level.
Hamsher's audience is the already-converted, who are expected to find her picture hilarious.
Someone in this race needs to come clean and call a timeout on all this. But something tells me that neither side will.
I think it's gonna get worse, particularly if Ned wins the primary and we go into "Connecticut for Lieberman" mode.
The reclusive sly blogger Anonymous
Spends the whole day hand on a mouse
With quick cut and paste
Seems he posts in great haste
As his posts aren't fine or magnanimous.
I think it was perfectly OK for the Lieberman campaign to bring up Ned and his racist golf club membership. He knew about this golf club, and the white's only membership for 10 years, and never did anything about it, until he was forced to resign from it because it would have negatively affected his campaign. The guy is total slime anf he should have to explain his actions. The fact he doesn't, says a lot about his character.
Ned and his NUTS ! They're quite a Team.
Lord Lieberman is the Dean Scream of 2006
Tom Delay Endorses Joe!
Joe Lieberman finally got the endorsement he’s been seeking for a long time. On Hannity & Colmes tonight, Tom Delay finally threw his hat into the hotly contested CT race and announced his support for Joe Lieberman over Ned Lamont. I’m sure the Democratic voters of CT will be totally swayed by his late entry into the campaign and some are saying–privately–that it’s the turning point in the race. And of course–Joe’s favorite network, FOX News– supplied the good voters of CT with the opportunity to hear Delay’s words loud and clear.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/posts/2006/08/02/tom-delay-hearts-joe-lieberman/
Ned and his NUTS ! They're quite a Team.
But isn't the discussion about Joe Lieberman's judgement?
About his refusal to adequately regulate the financial industry?
About his support for the bankruptcy bill?
About his go-along approach to Bush's authoritarian, anti-Constitutional abuse of power?
About Joe Lieberman's support for, and blatant misrepresentation of, a reckless and counterproductive war in Iraq that's endangered us all?
And aren't Joe Lieberman's lies about "how well" things are going in Iraq just as bad as the lies that got us INTO that war? Don't both sets of lies repeat the biggest mistakes made in Vietnam?
And don't those lies put our soldiers in an always, already untenable, position?
This says it all... Lieberman will not only lose the primary, he is losing all his dignity and integrity in the process...
***********
babablacksheep said...
Jimbo says Simply put, the flyer effectively points out that white country club going, millionare CEO Ned can not relate to African American voters.
Yes, Lieberman fans, is that the kind of America we want??! A place where it is unthinkable that people from different backgrounds can get along??!
Shame. Shame. Shame on you Liebermanites.
And yes, this incident only demonstrates the moral integrity of the Lamont campiagn which immediately condemned any devisive tactics (although the point of Jane's message was quite different). On the other hand, the Lieberman campaign, including its official spokespersons, proudly support such vile and un-American and devisive race-baiting.
Is this the disgusting "Tomorrow" that Lieberman promises?? A country where white people cannot get along? Very different from the message of Lamont's TV ad with Bridgeport students.
Shame on Lieberman for running such a campaign!
Quinnipiac Poll
28 point swing since June 8
LIKELY DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY VOTERS.......
Aug 3 Jul 20 Jun 8
2006 2006 2006
Lieberman 41 47 55
Lamont 54 51 40
SMONE ELSE(VOL) - - -
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL) - - -
DK/NA 5 2 4
Lamont’s fav rating: 46%-14%
Liebermans: 37%-34%
By 88%-12%, Lamont voters have made up their mind. 83%-16% of Lieberman voters say the same.
Oh yeah...Hamsher is REAL independent from the Lamont campaign:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/theplank?pid=28641
Here's Ned Lamont, as quoted in today's Washington Post article on Jane Hamsher's blackface stunt:
Lamont brushed past reporters Wednesday night in Bridgeport, saying: "I don't know anything about the blogs. I'm not responsible for those. I have no comment on them."
And here's Lamont a few weeks ago in a chummy video interview with Hamsher that's up on YouTube. The most relevant portion begins about 1:20 in:
HAMSHER: And what about Blogosphere Day tomorrow? What do you think about Blogosphere Day?
LAMONT: I'm happy for Blogosphere Day. I will be there any way I can because you guys were there for me at the beginning and . . . helped get a lot of the interest and excitement and grassroots in this campaign early on. . . .
HAMSHER: So Ned, you're going to be matching people's donations with your own personal funds. That's really amazing.
LAMONT: That's right. I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I care very strongly about this race, but I can't do it without everybody else. And frankly we've been doing that all along. We've had over 15,000 people--15,000--donate to this campaign. . . .
HAMSHER: That's great. Joe's got defense money and big pharma, and you've got 15,000 people giving $20 at a time.
LAMONT: And some friends at Fire Dog Lake.
And Hamsher has been tagging along with the Lamont campaign for months. She may not be on the payroll, but the idea that she's independent of the campaign is a JOKE.
I never said Gerstein was independent of the Lieberman campaign...he obviously isn't. Same with Hamsher and Lamont. Deal with it.
The plain unvarnished truth is the Lamont campaign was started and fueled by the Republican enablers of the "left" blogosphere.
They need to deal with, as does Lamont.
If Lamont distances himself from liars like Hamsher, who is truly out of her depth commenting on political issues, he needs to bear in mind the saying from the 1966 movie, The Oscar, that "you lie down with pigs, you come up smellin' like garbage."
leberman: love the pix - gave "Ned and his NUTS" a hundred bucks, thanks.
Well, Katherine Harris is worse. But Lieberman is a terrible candidate.
BTW, I agree with Dan Gerstein and the Lieberman supporters on this website. DO NOT VOTE FOR JANE HAMSHER IN DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY!
Oh, she's not on the ballot? Well, er, never mind.
Oh yeah. 77 Senators vote in favor of the war, 90 have voted to continue funding it, and Lieberman is the only one who is responsible for the terrorists killing Americans.
Go talk to Jane Hamsher. She'll listen to you AND paint you in blackface!
"In a time of war, we undermine the President's credibility at our nation's peril"
- Joe Lieberman
Yeah. When we read history books in 20 years, this is going to be called "Lieberman's War." Puh-leeeze. He supported it, but he isn't even as strongly pro-war as all Senate Democrats (Ben Nelson comes to mind), much less Republicans.
He had nothing to do with planning it.
He had nothing to do with organizing it.
He had nothing to do with Bush's failures in winning the peace.
Lieberman might support it, but it's Bush's war. But go talk to Jane "Blackface" Hamsher if you are scared of the truth!
"It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be Commander-in-Chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war we undermine Presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.
It is time for Republicans in the White House and Congress who distrust Democrats to acknowledge that greater Democratic involvement and support in the war in Iraq is critical to rebuilding the support of the American people that is essential to our success in that war.
It is time for Americans and we their leaders to start working together again on the war on terrorism."
- Joe Lieberman
Easy to miss the main point when you're dishonest, isn't it.
Compare with Lamont and his siamese twin, Jane "Blackface" Hamsher:
HAMSHER: And what about Blogosphere Day tomorrow? What do you think about Blogosphere Day?
LAMONT: I'm happy for Blogosphere Day. I will be there any way I can because you guys were there for me at the beginning and . . . helped get a lot of the interest and excitement and grassroots in this campaign early on. . . .
HAMSHER: So Ned, you're going to be matching people's donations with your own personal funds. That's really amazing.
LAMONT: That's right. I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I care very strongly about this race, but I can't do it without everybody else. And frankly we've been doing that all along. We've had over 15,000 people--15,000--donate to this campaign. . . .
HAMSHER: That's great. Joe's got defense money and big pharma, and you've got 15,000 people giving $20 at a time.
LAMONT: And some friends at Fire Dog Lake.
Sheesh.
Can you be more dishonest?
A CAMPAIGN flyer compared to an independent blogger, a blogger whose actions were immediately condemned by Lamont?
Your principles and integrity are on par with Leiberman. You are truly a LieberDem.
The flyer is wrong, but it's pointless to pretend that Hamsher is not connected to Lamont's campaign.
Too bad Hamsher isn't on the ballot. Otherwise, the Lieberdems might really be able to spin some gold out of this turd.
History will not be kind to Joe Lieberman
Too bad Lieberman isn't Bush. Otherwise the Lamontistas might really be able to spin some gold out of this turd.
History won't give a damn about Joe Lieberman.
Then CT certainly doesn't need Ned Lamont, who has sold himself out to Jane "Blackface" Hamsher and Markos "Screw 'Em" Zuniga.
I agree with the Lieberdems. People should definitely not vote for Jane Hamsher in the primary.
I agree with the Lamontistas. People should definitely not vote for George Bush in the primary.
Dear god, what an ass....
Oh really? Seems to me Lieberman has criticized Bush's handling of Iraq before:
ANNOUNCER: George W. Bush courts the National Urban League today, and seven of his Democratic challenges tag along. We'll tell you about the campaign to woo black voters.
As the search for Saddam continues, more U.S. soldiers die in Iraq. And another '04 Dem accuses the White House of bungling the peace.
SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN (D), CONNECTICUT: The Bush administration threatens to give a bad name to a just war.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0307/28/ip.00.html
That was three years ago, and it was almost the exact same thing as he said yesterday.
Go cry about it to Jane "Blackface" Hamsher!
We all knew Lieberman thought the war was "just," and we all know that he has criticized Bush's handling of it before. So none of this is anything new, except the lies of you and Jane "Blackface" Hamsher.
"It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be Commander-in-Chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war, we undermine Presidential credibility at our nation's peril."
"It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be Commander-in-Chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war we undermine Presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.
It is time for Republicans in the White House and Congress who distrust Democrats to acknowledge that greater Democratic involvement and support in the war in Iraq is critical to rebuilding the support of the American people that is essential to our success in that war.
It is time for Americans and we their leaders to start working together again on the war on terrorism."
- Joe Lieberman
One thing I can't understand is why Lieberman thinks he can rewrite history any way he wants. Doesn't he understand that his record is out there, and that people aren't stupid?
You people actually think if you post the same dishonesty frequently enough, people will start to believe it! Too bad it doesn't work that way.
Here's the whole quote:
"It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be Commander-in-Chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war we undermine Presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.
It is time for Republicans in the White House and Congress who distrust Democrats to acknowledge that greater Democratic involvement and support in the war in Iraq is critical to rebuilding the support of the American people that is essential to our success in that war.
It is time for Americans and we their leaders to start working together again on the war on terrorism."
Sounds like a man trying to unite the country. Too bad you're too dishonest to acknowledge that is the main point of the speech.
Go cry about it to Jane "Blackface" Hamsher!
Oh, and here's some history with Lieberman criticizing Bush on Iraq THREE YEARS AGO, in its original form for your consumption:
NNOUNCER: George W. Bush courts the National Urban League today, and seven of his Democratic challenges tag along. We'll tell you about the campaign to woo black voters.
As the search for Saddam continues, more U.S. soldiers die in Iraq. And another '04 Dem accuses the White House of bungling the peace.
SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN (D), CONNECTICUT: The Bush administration threatens to give a bad name to a just war.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0307/28/ip.00.html
He said almost the exact same thing yesterday. We all knew Lieberman thought the war was "just," and we all know that he has criticized Bush's handling of it before. So none of this is anything new, except the lies of you and Jane "Blackface" Hamsher.
Check out this photo from Jane "Blackface" Hamsher:
http://www.redstate.com/redstate/huffpo_before.jpg
Very poignant stuff.
Hahaha...keep trying. But we'll never stop posting the whole truth:
ANNOUNCER: George W. Bush courts the National Urban League today, and seven of his Democratic challenges tag along. We'll tell you about the campaign to woo black voters.
As the search for Saddam continues, more U.S. soldiers die in Iraq. And another '04 Dem accuses the White House of bungling the peace.
SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN (D), CONNECTICUT: The Bush administration threatens to give a bad name to a just war.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0307/28/ip.00.html
He said almost the exact same thing yesterday. We all knew Lieberman thought the war was "just," and we all know that he has criticized Bush's handling of it before. So none of this is anything new, except the lies of you and Jane "Blackface" Hamsher.
And of course, the whole quote:
"It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be Commander-in-Chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war we undermine Presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.
It is time for Republicans in the White House and Congress who distrust Democrats to acknowledge that greater Democratic involvement and support in the war in Iraq is critical to rebuilding the support of the American people that is essential to our success in that war.
It is time for Americans and we their leaders to start working together again on the war on terrorism."
Sounds like a man trying to unite the country. Too bad you're too dishonest to acknowledge that is the main point of the speech.
Go cry about it to Jane "Blackface" Hamsher!
http://www.redstate.com/redstate/huffpo_before.jpg
You toss the voters a load of crap, and we'll keep throwing it right back in your face.
Long as you keep telling only the parts of the story that suit you and always ignore the rest, we won't stop. Sorry! The distortions of you and Jane "Blackface" Hamsher are no match for reality!
Could someone please explain that Jane "Blackface" Hamsher is not a candidate in this race? I don't know why this is so hard for them to understand.
As soon as you stop idiotically connecting Lieberman and Bush, we'll stop connecting Lamont and Hamsher.
Sorry, but George Bush isn't following around Joe Lieberman on the campaign trail, raising money for him, and doing his campaign's dirty work for him. And - oh yeah - Lieberman has RUN AGAINST BUSH TWICE.
So stop being a hypocrite, or go cry about it to "Blackface" Hamsher.
Well, tell your friends in the progressive blogosphere to stop being cowards and post the picture. Because right now, only the reactionary blogs are carrying it.
Isn't it funny how Lamont's internet supporters cower in a corner and hide the truth when it's inconvenient to them?
Believe me, no one is asking you to stop. You are making the arguments for voting for Lieberman and against the liars who distort his record much better than we ever could.
Oh yeah...Hamsher is REAL independent from the Lamont campaign:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/theplank?pid=28641
Here's Ned Lamont, as quoted in today's Washington Post article on Jane Hamsher's blackface stunt:
Lamont brushed past reporters Wednesday night in Bridgeport, saying: "I don't know anything about the blogs. I'm not responsible for those. I have no comment on them."
And here's Lamont a few weeks ago in a chummy video interview with Hamsher that's up on YouTube. The most relevant portion begins about 1:20 in:
HAMSHER: And what about Blogosphere Day tomorrow? What do you think about Blogosphere Day?
LAMONT: I'm happy for Blogosphere Day. I will be there any way I can because you guys were there for me at the beginning and . . . helped get a lot of the interest and excitement and grassroots in this campaign early on. . . .
HAMSHER: So Ned, you're going to be matching people's donations with your own personal funds. That's really amazing.
LAMONT: That's right. I'm putting my money where my mouth is. I care very strongly about this race, but I can't do it without everybody else. And frankly we've been doing that all along. We've had over 15,000 people--15,000--donate to this campaign. . . .
HAMSHER: That's great. Joe's got defense money and big pharma, and you've got 15,000 people giving $20 at a time.
LAMONT: And some friends at Fire Dog Lake.
And Hamsher has been tagging along with the Lamont campaign for months. She may not be on the payroll, but the idea that she's independent of the campaign is a JOKE.
Do you want us to see if we could get you a date with Hamsher? You really are hooked on her, you little love-puppy!
You want me to get you a date with Matt? You guys hang around here so much that he might need a restraining order!
I'll keep it up as long as L4L here does. Say what you will, but at least the posts I make are not filled with half-truths, even if you don't agree with my interpretations of the relationships.
What a joke...DeLay didn't endorse him and you know it. He said he agreed with Lieberman on Iraq, but that otherwise Lieberman is a liberal. And God knows Tom DeLay is not a liberal.
Call the foul.
Good points, Sundog.
Restrained himself from hitting a man he's never met before? Wow. What self-control. He should run anger management classes.
On another note - have a good day, Sundog.
They sure could use some anger management classes at this site. I feel for the Lieberdems though, losing is tough.
Sorry you mistake "telling the truth" for "anger." Besides, every journalist in the world covering this race has talked about the anger of the ANTI-Lieberman crowd. Like the guy who nearly punched Lieberman in the face just because he disagreed with him.
Did anyone notice that a poll came out today showing Lamont up by 13 points, after being an unknown behind by 15 points as recently as June 8.
Pretty big news, but strangely no mention of it here.
Can Lieberman supporters give me some confidence that Joe has a plan to win?
Thanks.
Has the Lieberman campaign apologized for the race-baiting flyers yet?
I don't think so, but I think the Lieberdems have established that they have the HOTS for Jane Hamsher!
Hahaha...keep trying. But we'll never stop posting the whole truth:
ANNOUNCER: George W. Bush courts the National Urban League today, and seven of his Democratic challenges tag along. We'll tell you about the campaign to woo black voters.
As the search for Saddam continues, more U.S. soldiers die in Iraq. And another '04 Dem accuses the White House of bungling the peace.
SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN (D), CONNECTICUT: The Bush administration threatens to give a bad name to a just war.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0307/28/ip.00.html
He said almost the exact same thing yesterday.
We all knew Lieberman thought the war was "just," and we all know that he has criticized Bush's handling of it before. So none of this is anything new, except the lies of you and Jane "Blackface" Hamsher.
And of course, the whole quote:
"It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be Commander-in-Chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war we undermine Presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.
It is time for Republicans in the White House and Congress who distrust Democrats to acknowledge that greater Democratic involvement and support in the war in Iraq is critical to rebuilding the support of the American people that is essential to our success in that war.
It is time for Americans and we their leaders to start working together again on the war on terrorism."
Sounds like a man trying to unite the country. Too bad you're too dishonest to acknowledge that is the main point of the speech.
Go cry about it to Jane "Blackface" Hamsher!
I think the Lieberdems are right. Joe Lieberman could probably do pretty well against Jane Hamsher in the Senate race.
Here's what I just don't understand. For weeks and weeks, we've been hearing from these Lieberdems how pathetic those "lefty, liberal blogs" are. Whatever happened to that?
Now all of a sudden they're fixated on the "irrelevant liberal blog" Huffington Post and Jane Hamsher, and can't talk about anything else?
I guess they're now in the "throes of victory", or something like that.
I don't remember too many people calling them irrelevant. And all we're doing is pointing out that when you cast your lot with dogs like Lamont has, you can't simply walk away from the stench they leave behind.
Anyone notice that the rhetoric here is a bit more unbalanced than the tone of the post? Dear lord...call BS against both sides.
I doubt if anyone pays much attention to those front-page posts. That stuff is all just drivel and lies.
You're referring to the front pages of firedoglake and MyDD? I totally agree.
What exactly on the front page of this site is a lie? Not something you disagree with, but a lie. The liars are the people on the anti-Lieberman sites painting Lieberman in blackface and posting quotes out of context as if they're the whole story.
I don't agree with everything on this site. But calling it a lie is just bogus.
l4l - good posts today, thanks for the time/effort
Oh, and I forgot to mention - you can file some of lamont/hamsher's comments under "dishonest" as well.
When did Smith say Gerstein is independent?
moderation said...
When did Smith say Gerstein is independent?
When he posted the disclaimer, "This website is not funded by, authorized by, or affiliated with any campaign or candidate." and at the same time had Dan Gerstein as one of only two regular contributors on this site.
As a reader of this blog, I sincerely thought that Den Gerstein was NOT affiliated with this website, and I was fooled.
But how is that statement untrue? Gerstein was not affiliated with the Lieberman campaign until Monday, and he left the blog (or, more likely, Smith kicked him off) after he joined up.
Besides, does the fact that Bill Maher posts on Huffington Post mean that the site is affiliated with HBO? It seems obvious that this is Smith's site and that he never lied about Gerstein's affiliation.
You won't hear me defend Gerstein, particularly since he defended that flyer (I actually despise Gerstein), but calling Smith a liar is just a bogus charge. At worst, he was duped by Gerstein. Not that that's a good thing, but it doesn't make him a liar.
Yeah...no one could possible disagree with you unless they were being paid. Geez. Can I borrow a cup of ego from you at some point?
Sounds like all politicians. Why should Joe be any different?
The Constitution State deserves a Senator who will stand up for the Constitution
<< Home